Home » North America, Suppression, Videos » Suspected Drunken Drivers face Forced Blood Draws in Georgia


Suspected Drunken Drivers face Forced Blood Draws in Georgia

 
 
 
 
 
submit to reddit

Shock video out of Georgia shows police strapping down citizens accused of drunk driving before using a needle forcibly draw blood as the victim screams, “what country is this?”

The policy of police obtaining a warrant to draw blood from those merely suspected of being drunk at a DUI checkpoint or a routine traffic stop has been in place for years across many states, but to actually see it in action is disturbing.

The clip shows individuals being strapped down on a padded table at the Gwinnett County jail. Even those who show no resistance whatsoever are forcibly restrained and have their heads pressed down by an officer using his elbow.

“We all are American citizens and you guys have me strapped to a table like I’m in Guantanamo f***ing Bay,” complains another victim of the blood draw.

Mike Choroski, the man seen screaming “what country is this” as officers hold him down and take his blood without consent, is still awaiting trial, claiming that he is not guilty and there was no accident involving his vehicle.

“I’m a taxpaying American who refused something….I refused to do this….what happened to me in that room was unnessesary and nobody should have to do that,” said Choroski.

“Holding down and forcing somebody to submit to this is really intrusive in terms of that level of invasive procedure into someone’s body is ridiculous for investigating a misdemeanour,” Attorney David Boyle told Fox 5 Atlanta, describing the forced blood draws as an “unreasonable search” under the 4th Amendment.

Despite the fact that citizens can lose their drivers license for a year if they refuse a standard breathlyser test, cops can then get a warrant to forcibly draw blood, “for every DUI stop, even if there’s no accident or injury.”

In Gwinnett County, Georgia police have carried out more than 100 forced blood draws since January.

“I’m stunned, I did not know that this was legal, I did not know they could take your blood without your consent,” said a Fox 5 anchor in response to the clip, opining that the process was a violation of the 4th Amendment.

Georgia is one of numerous states that enforce “no refusal” checkpoints where police can forcibly draw blood. In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not unconstitutional for the state to hold down Americans and forcefully withdraw blood. A January 2013 ruling affirmed that a warrant must be obtained for the process, although police could dispense with the warrant requirement in an “emergency”.

Source

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  



RELATED ARTICLES

Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.
  • If this is constitutional, then we are all living under a false impression. We are not free if this is sanctioned by SCOTUS. If they can withdraw blood against your will, they can as easily inject you with an agent against your will and kill you. This is the ultimate violation of ones privacy. Are Georgians all under a truth serum ? They should be destroying their state capital and every elected official that invoked this draconian practice.

  • Echelon

    This video demonstrates the difference between a republic (which is what the Founders gave us) and a democracy (which came later, introduced by banking dynasties).

    In a republic, individual liberties reign supreme. It is what Jefferson spoke of when he said, “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” Likewise, it is what Franklin spoke of when he said, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety, and will lose both.”

    By contrast, a democracy is mob rule, where 51% can violate the rights of the other 49%. Democracy rides on the mindset, morals, logic and reason of the majority. It has been (correctly) said that democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. Those who created and introduced democracy after the original Republic was founded knew that if they could get people to accept and participate in democracy, and then, through all manner of vice, brainwashing, propaganda, programming and distractions, corrupt the mindset, morals, logic and reason of the general populace, a complete subversion and destruction of the original Republic established by the Founders would be effected in a relatively short time — and we see the results everywhere today. Staunch supporters of democracy should carefully consider the words of the Banker’s Manifesto of 1892, as presented by Charles Lidnbregh Sr. on the House floor: “[…] When, through the process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of the government applied to a central power of imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. History repeats itself in regular cycles. This truth is well known among our principal men who are engaged in forming an imperialism of the world. While they are doing this, the people must be kept in a state of political antagonism. The question of tariff reform must be urged through the organization known as the Democratic Party, and the question of protection with the reciprocity must be forced to view through the Republican Party. By thus dividing voters, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us, except as teachers to the common herd. […]” Today we can easily see, if we permit ourselves the time and trouble to observe it, that when people can be duped into accepting a mob rule system, and when those people are brainwashed over time, they will not only accept, but will demand, things that would sicken the Founders and which trample the principles on which the united states of the American Union was created.

    This may sound a bit shoicking to some and there’s not enough room in this box to explain it here, but when these people willingly participate in the system of democracy and/or accept its benefits, they have unwittingly given a form of consent to be strapped to a table and have their blood forcibly drawn, even when they lie there screaming, “I don’t consent!” When one willingly participates in the democratic system and/or to have representation within that system and/or accepts its benefits, then one has agreed to accept anything that system imposes on its participants or beneficiaries, whether they like it or not.

    As a side note here, people need to learn that “Supreme Court of The United States” and “United States Supreme Court” are NOT the same.

    Now, on to Phil Miller. He is a shining example of one who has been so brainwashed that he actually believes that what he is doing is right and just, even though (presumably – I will find out via public records requests) he has properly sworn an oath to the contrary. He is also so overwhelmingly terse and arrogant that I might actualy make a trip to his county and bait his officers into accosting me so that I can lock him at the hip with me in federal court for at least 5 years. He has to know that when he acts with such arrogance then sooner or later someone is going to come along who comprehends the difference between law and statutes, and who will hold him accountable under actual law for his transgressions and make his life a living hell that is the sum total of the hell to which he has arrogantly and unjustly subjected so many others. As to his assertion that the suggestion that “the police will manufacture evidence” is a “bold-faced lie,” I have two responses. First, no one is falling for it, Miller. Almost everyone these days knows that (a) police across the nation routinely manufacture evidence, (b) the more people there are locked up in jails, the more money police organizations make, (c) the more convictions there are, the more money the courts make, even though they still pretend it’s about “justice,” (d) there is a strong economic incentive/interest in jailing/convicting people, whether or not they are guilty of any real crime, (e) police are trained to lie, deceive and intimidate in order to gain consent and/or get people to say things that can be twisted to incriminate them even when they are guilty of no real crime, and (f) “to protect and serve” has been bastardized in modern times to mean that your job these days is to protect the for-profit corporation you serve from the people you used to serve, and you damn well know it (you can deny it all you want). Second, you remind me of these guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iklwMl0ZEtw . As to Miller’s statement, “there’s hardly anybody that you can talk to that doesn’t know somebody that was killed by a drunk driver,” similarly, these days there’s hardly anybody one can talk to who doesn’t know someone who has been brutalized, robbed, threatened, coered, lied to and/or who has had his/her rights trampled by a police officer acting unlawfully, ultra vires and against his official oath. The latter is what we “ought to do something about.” Miller stated that the strategy of not cooperating with police has made their draconian job more difficult. I find this encouraging. Miller also indicated that he doesn’t not want the message, “don’t cooperate with police,” to get out. This is why: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc .

    I do wholeheartedly agree with Carl Sims’ statement, “you can play Russian roulette if you want to, but sooner or later it’s going to catch up with you.” You’re damn right it is, buddy. You need to think about that every time you strap someone to that table. You need to always have in the back of your head the thought, “Is he the one? Is THIS the guy who will finally be keeping me tied up so tightly in federal lawsuits for the next several years that I can’t breathe, win or lose? Is THIS the guy who will finally be presenting me directly to a federal grand jury via multiple verified criminal complaints?”

    Each and every individual who is strapped to that table and whose test results come back as “clean” need to be filing both civilly and criminally at both the state and federal level for unlawful arrest/detainment, aggravated assault, official oppression, deprivation of rights under color of law and incompetence, to name only a few. Those whose test results come back “not clean” still need to take the warrant through a Franks Hearing. Those who are prosecuted and win their case need to file for malicious prosecution.

Copyright © 2009 The European Union Times – Breaking News, Latest News. All rights reserved.